FDIC RIF Plans

[Anonymous]

You wanna talk about national security risks, PP? Not to discount the value of professionalism and discretion, and I'm not the PP you're responding to, I'm not a Fed, and I have no inside information to safeguard. BUT, the current administration, its policies, and its henchmen are presenting civil servants with what they know darn well are MASSIVE attacks on our national security. Let's just be clear about who is the real threat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please be mindful of the confidentiality agreements that you signed regarding any upcoming RIFs.

WTF????

Leaking For Official Use Only (FOUO) information, such as details about upcoming RIFs, violates federal law (18 U.S. Code § 1905). It can result in termination of employment, revocation of your security clearance, loss of pension, forfeiture of your deferred resignation agreement, and even criminal prosecution, including fines and imprisonment. This isn’t just a policy violation, it’s a national security risk. Don’t jeopardize your career and future over a moment of anger or frustration.

lol ding dong. That is the Trade Secrets Act. it doesn’t apply to information about a RIF.

[Anonymous]

Looks like the Chairman's office is sending out the Town Hall Invites to each division and office now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is the FDIC even considering a RIf when the salaries don’t even come from taxpayer money? Firing them doesn’t affect the budget bottom line at all. Their salaries come from the banks they serve. None of this makes sense unless the agency is just trying to kiss ass with the powers that be.

Hi- plenty of us are at agencies that bring in a lot more money than we cost. Mine sends the money to Treasury unlike FDIC, but same idea. The administration doesn't care if you're revenue producing or not. Pain is the plan.

This doesn’t resonate with the average American. The money comes from somewhere.

[Anonymous]

Well Vought is on the FDICs board of directors so I'd say you guys are pretty fcked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is the FDIC even considering a RIf when the salaries don’t even come from taxpayer money? Firing them doesn’t affect the budget bottom line at all. Their salaries come from the banks they serve. None of this makes sense unless the agency is just trying to kiss ass with the powers that be.

Hi- plenty of us are at agencies that bring in a lot more money than we cost. Mine sends the money to Treasury unlike FDIC, but same idea. The administration doesn't care if you're revenue producing or not. Pain is the plan.

This doesn’t resonate with the average American. The money comes from somewhere.

Well, the ignorance of the population is 90% of the reason bad actors like Trump have been allowed to get so far. The money comes from the billionaires. That is why they want to slash the organization that charges them fees to monitor the banks they create for trustworthiness. The government organization is there to protect a public too stupid to understand they need an advocate. YOU ARE BEING USED, MAGA FRIEND. Trump, Musk, and friends are laughing at you all the way to the banks they are about to cause to fail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is the FDIC even considering a RIf when the salaries don’t even come from taxpayer money? Firing them doesn’t affect the budget bottom line at all. Their salaries come from the banks they serve. None of this makes sense unless the agency is just trying to kiss ass with the powers that be.

Hi- plenty of us are at agencies that bring in a lot more money than we cost. Mine sends the money to Treasury unlike FDIC, but same idea. The administration doesn't care if you're revenue producing or not. Pain is the plan.

This doesn’t resonate with the average American. The money comes from somewhere.

Well, the ignorance of the population is 90% of the reason bad actors like Trump have been allowed to get so far. The money comes from the billionaires. That is why they want to slash the organization that charges them fees to monitor the banks they create for trustworthiness. The government organization is there to protect a public too stupid to understand they need an advocate. YOU ARE BEING USED, MAGA FRIEND. Trump, Musk, and friends are laughing at you all the way to the banks they are about to cause to fail.

I thought it came from banks that have shareholders, no?

https://www.fdic.gov/resources/deposit-insurance/deposit-insurance-fund

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is the FDIC even considering a RIf when the salaries don’t even come from taxpayer money? Firing them doesn’t affect the budget bottom line at all. Their salaries come from the banks they serve. None of this makes sense unless the agency is just trying to kiss ass with the powers that be.

Hi- plenty of us are at agencies that bring in a lot more money than we cost. Mine sends the money to Treasury unlike FDIC, but same idea. The administration doesn't care if you're revenue producing or not. Pain is the plan.

This doesn’t resonate with the average American. The money comes from somewhere.

Well, the ignorance of the population is 90% of the reason bad actors like Trump have been allowed to get so far. The money comes from the billionaires. That is why they want to slash the organization that charges them fees to monitor the banks they create for trustworthiness. The government organization is there to protect a public too stupid to understand they need an advocate. YOU ARE BEING USED, MAGA FRIEND. Trump, Musk, and friends are laughing at you all the way to the banks they are about to cause to fail.

I thought it came from banks that have shareholders, no?

https://www.fdic.gov/resources/deposit-insurance/deposit-insurance-fund

\

Somewhat ironic that the prior poster referred to the population as ignorant and stupid while making a wildly incorrect statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well Vought is on the FDICs board of directors so I'd say you guys are pretty fcked.

.

No his isn’t anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You wanna talk about national security risks, PP? Not to discount the value of professionalism and discretion, and I'm not the PP you're responding to, I'm not a Fed, and I have no inside information to safeguard. BUT, the current administration, its policies, and its henchmen are presenting civil servants with what they know darn well are MASSIVE attacks on our national security. Let's just be clear about who is the real threat.

Maybe you should take the training, FOUO is not to be leaked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well Vought is on the FDICs board of directors so I'd say you guys are pretty fcked.

.

No his isn’t anymore.

Umm I think you're wrong: https://www.fdic.gov/about/board-directors-senior-executives

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You wanna talk about national security risks, PP? Not to discount the value of professionalism and discretion, and I'm not the PP you're responding to, I'm not a Fed, and I have no inside information to safeguard. BUT, the current administration, its policies, and its henchmen are presenting civil servants with what they know darn well are MASSIVE attacks on our national security. Let's just be clear about who is the real threat.

Maybe you should take the training, FOUO is not to be leaked.

FOUO is an outdated marking … I don’t think you have any clue what you are talking about. People are allowed to talk about the terms and conditions of their employment (like RIFs and terminations).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You wanna talk about national security risks, PP? Not to discount the value of professionalism and discretion, and I'm not the PP you're responding to, I'm not a Fed, and I have no inside information to safeguard. BUT, the current administration, its policies, and its henchmen are presenting civil servants with what they know darn well are MASSIVE attacks on our national security. Let's just be clear about who is the real threat.

Maybe you should take the training, FOUO is not to be leaked.

FOUO is an outdated marking … I don’t think you have any clue what you are talking about. People are allowed to talk about the terms and conditions of their employment (like RIFs and terminations).

In any case, I'm sure that people are smart enough not to comment about their employer on their work assigned hardware.

[Anonymous]

They have plenty of folks lingering there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They have plenty of folks lingering there.

Who is “they”? Aren’t most of the leaks coming from DOGE anyway?

It is a bit weird that PP is getting so worked up about leaks in this particular thread. The leaking seems to be across all agencies.